<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cisterns or Trees&#8230;?</title>
	<atom:link href="https://beta.jewcology.com/2012/01/cisterns-or-trees/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://beta.jewcology.com/2012/01/cisterns-or-trees/</link>
	<description>Home of the Jewish Environmental Movement</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2015 16:55:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.40</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Isaac Hametz</title>
		<link>https://beta.jewcology.com/2012/01/cisterns-or-trees/comment-page-1/#comment-569</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Isaac Hametz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 11:14:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jewcology.org/2012/01/cisterns-or-trees/#comment-569</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rabbi Cardin, the story you shared proposes an interesting dichotomy - civilization versus nature. However, I wonder if this dualism serves to obfuscate a more nuanced, hybrid reality in which humanity is a part of nature. If we can accept this condition of human nature, how do we interpret social contracts like property laws in the framework of natural laws? If our social contracts follow Rabbi Yossi&#039;s opinion, what are we saying about our relationship to natural laws? It would seem to me that as humanity has moved farther away from creation, the Garden of Eden, Noah, Abraham, etc we have moved farther away from the reality of human nature to a position of human versus nature. Our social contracts reflect this transformation and prioritize human constructs in place of natural conduct, which leaves us in the precarious position you present - that civilization cannot survive without nature. How then can we restore our social contracts so they reflect our renewed understanding of human nature, not human versus nature?
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rabbi Cardin, the story you shared proposes an interesting dichotomy &#8211; civilization versus nature. However, I wonder if this dualism serves to obfuscate a more nuanced, hybrid reality in which humanity is a part of nature. If we can accept this condition of human nature, how do we interpret social contracts like property laws in the framework of natural laws? If our social contracts follow Rabbi Yossi&#8217;s opinion, what are we saying about our relationship to natural laws? It would seem to me that as humanity has moved farther away from creation, the Garden of Eden, Noah, Abraham, etc we have moved farther away from the reality of human nature to a position of human versus nature. Our social contracts reflect this transformation and prioritize human constructs in place of natural conduct, which leaves us in the precarious position you present &#8211; that civilization cannot survive without nature. How then can we restore our social contracts so they reflect our renewed understanding of human nature, not human versus nature?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
